What Ryan got in his Omnibus

The Briefing, Vol. III, Issue 43-

To: Our Readers

This week:

Why Republicans agreed to the omnibus

The drawbacks

Three long-term benefits

Outlook

Ryan Omnibus: Conservatives have plenty of reasons to be unhappy with the omnibus spending bill that passed the House last week. But it is noteworthy that there was no massive conservative rebellion in the House, in a day and age when such rebellions seemed to be getting more common. One hundred fifty Republicans voted for the bill that Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., put forward. That’s about 50 more than had been expected originally. The low expectations existed for the very reasons rank and file conservatives are disappointed now: The bill does not stop federal funding for Planned Parenthood. It does not address the question of Syrian refugees in the way that many of them feel is appropriate. It does not stop Obama’s Clean Power Plant or Waters of the United States EPA rules (both now under litigation). It does not stop funding for Obama’s executive amnesty (also under litigation). It does not halt the Labor Department’s new fiduciary rule, a clear overreach.

For a lot of conservatives, one or more of these seems like a game-ender. Especially on Planned Parenthood, many believe that no other benefit of the law can outweigh what seems like a betrayal.

On the other hand, a fight to the death against Obama over Planned Parenthood at this particular moment would have been more likely to lead to a government-wide shutdown than the actual defunding of Planned Parenthood, and that has to be at least considered.

But there are three things this bill does that, given a long-term outlook, will promote large conservative goals that may not be immediately obvious. These are the areas to watch — the areas where history will ultimately judge Ryan’s speakership and determine how long he gets to keep it.

1. Obamacare Repeal: Believe it or not, the stage for repeal of this law has now been set. By keeping the 2014 Rubio provision intact, which bars any taxpayer bailout of insurers losing money in Obamacare’s exchanges, this omnibus prevents the Obama administration from wasting taxpayers’ money to delay the Obamacare law’s day of reckoning.

Although the issue has been slightly below the surface for more than a year, Obamacare is currently in greater peril than it was at any point during the government shutdown of 2013. Insurers are losing their shirts in the exchanges at a rate no one expected, mostly because the law (as critics predicted) brought in a sick, high-use crowd into the insurance market without attracting enough healthy payers to cover them. Premiums have risen and are expected to keep rising at a rate that has the potential cause a rebellion on the same scale as the anger over insurance cancellations and the HealthCare.gov website.

The problem is acute enough that Hillary Clinton had to acknowledge it during the little-watched Democratic debate over the weekend, referring to it as “glitches.”

What the Rubio provision does, originally passed in 2014, is prevent the “risk corridor” program — a provision in Obamacare that redistributes some insurance company profits from Obamacare’s biggest winners in its first three years to its worst losers — from drawing any funds from taxpayers. This merely bolsters the statutory language in Obamacare, which appears to imply that the only money available to pay out is that drawn from insurers with profits greater than three percent.

But there isn’t enough money being made by profitable insurers to bail out the many big losers. And so the Obama administration desperately wants to interpret this language as authorizing a large insurer subsidy that comes from the Treasury.

The inclusion of the Rubio provision stops this. And it will not, as some have suggested, kill Obamacare, but it will let it die a natural death with dignity. The risk corridor program was not intended to prop up unsound companies for the long haul, it was just supposed to brace them for the immediate shock of the new post-Obamacare insurance world. But not only are badly created insurance co-ops going out of business after losing as much as $100 million, but larger, experienced insurers like UnitedHealth are expected to pull out, a sign of just how badly the law was designed. This will lead to even higher premiums. Instead of ruining health insurance for a decade or more, the refusal to mollify insurers with a bailout is likely to shorten the period of destruction and force repeal (or reforms, if Democrats keep the White House) sooner.

The bottom line is that Republicans were right to insist on the inclusion of this provision, even if it had to come at the expense of some of their other priorities.

Well, maybe not. This has barely been noticed, but the package that just passed takes a critical step toward passage of a tax reform plan that conservatives will like. In fact, it would probably not be possible otherwise. Although the reasons are highly technical, we will go into them briefly, because one cannot grasp this without understanding them.

When the Congressional Budget Office calculates tax revenues and budget deficits, it is required to assume that current law will be followed as it is written. That sounds reasonable to the layman, but in fact it’s absurd. Congress changes laws all the time, and with tax laws, it has a nasty habit of extending certain tax breaks temporarily over and over and over again, so that they are effectively permanent. This makes the CBO always wrong in its revenue projections, but through no fault on its own. And that matters a lot.

A holy grail for conservatives — and a goal Ryan has personally pursued for years — is a major, revenue-neutral tax reform plan that cuts tax rates for everyone and makes up the lost revenue by eliminating special interest loopholes and deductions. The desired result is a simple tax code that collects about the same amount of revenue, but without strangling taxpayers in red tape and creating billions of hours of lost productivity.

The problem is that under CBO rules, the elimination of temporary loopholes and deductions doesn’t count toward “revenue-neutralizing” tax rate reductions, even in cases where those loopholes are constantly being extended and are effectively (but not legally) permanent. In other words, you can’t come out even if you eliminate a temporary special-interest tax break and lower the tax rate by a corresponding annual amount.

This means that in order to make the math work and ensure as low a tax rate as possible, you must first make permanent as many special-interest tax breaks as possible, so that you can eliminate them and use the increased revenue to lower rates by a corresponding amount. Otherwise, you face a tough choice — either tax reform becomes an actual tax hike that most Republicans have sworn to vote against, or you have a bill that technically increases the deficit and you might need 60 instead of 51 votes to get it through the Senate.

By making several (per se undesirable) special tax breaks permanent, Ryan is preparing the field for what he’s always wanted to do, increasing the likelihood of tax reform after Obama leaves office. It’s a longer-term goal, but it’s a very important one, considering how bad tax laws, accumulated over the years by special interests’ pleading and lobbying, made the U.S. economy less competitive over time.

3. Oil Exports: This one is perhaps the most obvious benefit. By repealing the irrational four-decade ban on oil exports and getting Obama to agree to it (reluctantly), Congress has set the stage for a future in which the U.S. is a net exporter of petroleum. As recently as last year, no one believed this legal change could be made. In the end, all it took was a small sop — a special tax break for independent refiners — to grease the wheels.

It’s been a long time since the world saw the U.S. exporting more oil than it imports — more than 70 years, as a matter of fact. But it is sure to happen as soon as prices rise again, and it will affect everything from the economy to foreign policy.

Trade deficits (a very large share of which — more than half in some recent years — have been due to oil imports) could become a worry of the past even when oil prices rise again. And hundreds of thousands of new, high-paying jobs would be created and secured for the long haul.

This is a clear win for prosperity over the forces of populist ignorance and demagoguery that took hold after the oil embargo.

So there you have three very long-term ideas that underpin the deal Republicans just agreed to in unexpectedly large numbers. The jury is out as to whether they got a good deal.

If Republicans had passed this bill just to ease Ryan into the speakership — as a courtesy to him, as Rep. Tim Huelskamp, R-Kan., put it — they would have been making a big mistake. But the fact is, they had other reasons as well. When judging Ryan’s performance as speaker, conservatives must keep an eye on how these areas develop. If he succeeds or fails, it will be based on these three main areas whether this deal ends up being a good one.

Thus ends the third year for The Briefing, which will next appear on Tuesday, Jan. 5. We wish a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to you and yours in the meantime. And get ready, 2016 is going to be wild.

Bye bye, EndofPatience. You know, I went through my own unsubscribing phase a short while ago, cutting loose all those newsletters announcing that Paul Ryan isn’t conservative enough. I could send you a list so you’ll know where to find your fellow travelers.

Really, PANSY? Is that the best that you can do? I suspect you are a trendy-leftie troll, because calling people names is how liberals argue. Conservatives use facts. And it is an indisputable FACT that Paul Ryan is a principled Conservative. He is Speaker of the House, not Speaker of the Extreme Right Wing of the Republican Party. There is a big difference. he understands it. Ghoul, on the other hand, want to silence through bitter invective and barely concealed hatred, anyone who might disagree with you.

You really don’t get that ‘Republicans’ (as in the GOP…like Ryan) are really democrats with an ‘R’ behind their name? If you support the GOP so much, why are you on CONSERVATIVE websites? To scope out the enemy? Why is wanting our representatives to do what they say and to support our laws and Constitution ‘hatred’?

I wish we could have this conversation in person so I could speak very slowly and make sure I use little words so you can understand.Wanting our representatives to do the right thing isn’t hatred. However, calling somebody a PANSY because you disagree with him is a pretty good example of hatred. If you think Paul Ryan is not a principled Conservative it suggests you haven’t been paying attention, that you don’t read or think for yourself but simply follow the instructions of fire-breathing extremists. I support the GOP because I think Republicans generally have stronger values than Democrats. Not all of them. Admittedly many of them are simply whores who mouth Republican principles because they see that as their best path to election, and they seek election because they want to get on the gravy train. But the GOP is the more CONSERVATIVE of the major parties. I find it laughable that people of your ilk think it is impossible to be both a Republican and a Conservative. It’s people of your ilk who stayed home in 2012 because you didn’t see any difference between Romney and Obama. You people are so ideologically rigid, so blinded with hatred and arrogance, the only difference between you and Islamist terrorists is you haven’t got the courage to blow yourselves up.

How very condescending of you! Aren’t you proud?
I didn’t call you anything…. not even a pansy.
I have been paying very close attention and would suggest that maybe YOU aren’t the one keeping up. You don’t know anything about my ‘ilk’ or anything else about me. I never said that one couldn’t be both, but Ryan is not as conservative as you seem to think and this proves it. If you can’t see that, then I’m not sure what to say to you.
I didn’t stay home in 2012. I don’t stay home in ANY election. I think in the last 20 years or so, I’ve missed maybe 2 opportunities to vote on off-term local policy ‘elections’. So please don’t assume. You know the saying…
I’m not idealogically rigid, nor do I hate. I’m far from arrogant (as opposed to you) and I would never suggest that simply because we disagree that you should ‘blow yourself up’. Who’s the hater? Who’s the one who’s rigid? If that is your idea of ‘stronger values’ of the GOP, then it’s no wonder the GOP is imploding.
I pity you. I really do. I don’t wish for you to blow yourself up…only wake up. You’re sad.

I never suggested you called anyone any names. You took issue with my previous post, which had been directed at the nonentity who had resorted to playground-quality name calling. You basically stated that because I vote Republican I am not welcome on Conservative websites. Anyone who reflects that sort of limited, limiting mindset certainly deserves to be damned by his fellow travelers, his ilk, if you wish. I’m glad you didn’t stay home in 2012. Unfortunately, some three million of your ilk did, and we got four more years of Obama and a world unraveling at its seams. Now you want to play this silly game of damning those who don’t toe your own narrow, rigid, ideologically challenged party line, too the detriment of conservative unity and the hopes of removing a Democrat from the White House.

You said I called you a pansy. I didn’t. You called me names, you started this mess and said that muslims are better than I am because ‘at least they have the courage to blow themselves up’. I didn’t start this.. you did.
I didn’t state anything like that at all. I voted R in the last election. And I have no control over anyone but myself, and certainly not ‘some three million’ others who didn’t vote at all. You know nothing about me, esp. if I’m holding a “narrow, rigid, ideologically challeged party line”. I simply said that if you don’t understand the difference between the GOP… THE GOP… and true conservatives, then YOU have a problem..and it’s very obvious that you do! You talk about ME not being a team player, but yet you want me to go blow myself up. lol Some team member you are. Why would I EVER want to be on ANY team with someone who would want me to kill myself and possibly others, as well? You’re sick. Very, very sick!

Let my try to explain again. URKiddinMee called me a pansy because I disagreed with him. I took him to task, telling him that name calling instead of arguing with facts was a liberal thing to do. I asked why you fire-breathing true believer conservatives hate people who disagree with you. In the meantime you took issue with some of my arguments, including my assertion that fire-breathing true believer conservatives have so much hate. You asked why I thought it was hateful to want to defend the constitution. I pointed out that the hatred was name calling. I still feel this way. I never said you called me a pansy, simply that I was called it, and that doing so was a sign of hatred. I don’t know how I can make you understand this. No, you didn’t call me that name. yes, you have nothing but hostility for my views because they don’t mesh exactly with yours. I happen to think Ryan’s budget strategy is a sound tactic to gain the sort of GOP control necessary to effect true change. You think he is some kind of leftist RINO. It is unbelievable.
Furthermore, I did not seriously suggest you blow yourself up. That was hyperbole.

If you truly think that funding EVERYTHING Obozo wants is a GOOD thing then., in my book, you are a liberal. And since every liberal I see in the news or have to associate with in the workplace is a pansy, I employed deductive reasoning to form my opinion. I could be in error, of course, but a long lifetime of developing disdain (Not hate) for liberals due to their disregard for our Constitution and their propensity for forcing their perverted wills upon the rest of us, prompted me to jump to a conclusion.
Let me correct you on a few false assumptions on your part. A large percentage of those who stayed home rather than vote for Romney were “Bible Belt Evangelicals” who considered Romney to be a member of a cult. Even Some Southern democrats whose “collective white guilt” had been assuaged by the first four pitiful years of Obama were not about to try to recitify their mistake by voting for a Mormon.
As far as my “hating those who disagree with me,” I only hate those who are willfully and knowingly wreaking destruction upon our once great, FREE Republic. Those such as George Soros, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Boxer, et al, warrant more than just disdain.
So far as dedication to ‘removing a Democrat from the White House,’ what the hell difference does it make when one considers the miniscule differences in party pholosophies?
We were told that if we elected a majority to Congress, they would fight to block Obozo’s Pell Mell rush to socialism. With a House majority and no change at all, we were promised that with a Senate majority the REAL fight would begin. Bullchit!
Same old,same old.
At least one of the worst RINO’s in the Senate has dropped out of the crowded field now that Graham bailed.
You paint true conservatives as being of an “ilk” who won’t listen to the “reasonable” arguments of tepid “moderates.” Maybe so,. I know I would rather be associated with that “ilk” rather than with those who capitulate to every desire of the socialists.

Wow. So much hatred. So much ignorance of the political process. It would be impossible to pass a balanced budget in one fell swoop. If you don’t agree, tell me how they could have cut $400 billion from a $1.1 trillion budget, or, conversely, who would pay the additional $400 billion in new taxes? You Ryan understands this. He also understands that empty posturing achieves nothing, and playing gotcha with the budget process in order to get the democrats to shut down the government never works because the media is always there to blame the Republicans, which harms the brand and makes it less likely they would get a workable majority, let alone the White House.
Of course, that doesn’t matter to you because you see all Republicans, except those who drink your brand of kool aid as being interchangeable with democrats. It’s a narrow, limiting point of view.
You claim not to hate, but your words drip with hate. Your refusal to call Obama by his name, preferring the sobriquet Obozo, is sheer hatred. I do not support Obama. I think what he has done to this country is beyond forgiveness, but I have sufficient respect for the office to call him by his name.

Perhaps much of the hatred is of the political process itself. Our Representatives were to go to Washington, represent their districts and then go home. They were not to make it a career path. You know politicians of both parties are beholden to the money, not The People. I hate how both parties feed at the trough of our tax dollars non-stop.

So if we are against using taxpayer dollars to Kill babies, then we are extreme right. Isn’t that what the liberals argue? Sounds like “bitter invective and barely concealed hatred for anyone who might disagree” The people who elected these “PRINCIPLED” conservatives have had enough with their tough talk and then betraying us when it’s time to step up. You have to hand it to the Democrats, because we always know what they stand for.

Ryan is Pro Amnesty, along with the other Chamberpot Repubs. I do admit most of the sElected Repubs are Chamberpots, and not conservatives.
Calling the majority of these elected elitists Rinos is nonsensical. We need a new “Liberty’ Party based on a restoration of the Constitution………but the coming economic tsunami will probably wipe out all academic discussions and throw us into a “Venezuela” 3rd world status.
Obamy, Maduro, and Castro all seem quite “comrade” comfortable together.

The majority of people are stupid , so nothing you say makes any difference.That is why as angry I get I still vote and vote Republican. In the words of Ann Coulter “There maybe some bad Republicans but there are NO good Democrats.”. The only way for evil to survive is for good men to do nothing. Not voting is doing nothing. Just remember we did not get into this in one fell swoop , we got here a little at a time. It is going take us years to change the course of this Country if we give up it will be worse for our children and grandchildren. If you can live with that you are a very selfish person.

The export ban? As US producers are shutting down wells. So hardly a gain. We are not a net producer anyway. We import oil.
The repeal of Obamacare set? The ACA is fully funded in this bill. And no future congress ever abides previous deals. They make new ones. So anything not done right now. It likely to never happen. As you very well know.
Tax Reform? Again future Congresses will not abide anything from this one. Ryan lied, there is not a doubt. He is the very embodiment of what is wrong with DC. The opposition crowing about they got everything. About how they won.
As for them fearing the government shut down. They were blamed for the last one. Yet hold more seats than in the last 150 years. They know this. They lie. You can not cover that fact up. A shutdown would not hurt them. The people who would complain. Would NEVER vote for them anyway.
Maybe time to change the name to Republican Intel.

Excellent analysis that explains the real dynamics and longer game, as well as what to monitor for future progress. Other commenters are sickened by the process, but seeing sausages and legislation made is never pretty.

So, special interest groups get their bribes worth from the deal is what I’m hearing. You expect me to believe that we needed to give the oil companies a “tax brake” to get them onboard with exporting oil? That’s simple idiocy and I’m not buying it. Conservative Intel has been proving to be a joke. You guys aren’t conservative, but another arm of the establishment republicans. Your special pleas to trust Paul Ryan will not be heard. This nonsense you’re peddling will not be purchased.

Ultra-light oil…often referred to as ‘condensate’ by the energy industry,

“U.S. refineries are mostly designed to process heavy (rather than light) crudes. Essentially, all current and projected increases in U.S. crude production have been in light sweet crude, meaning that the U.S. has much to gain by exporting this light crude.

As far as tax reform, the only solution is to get replace the income tax with a consumption tax. I’m tired of spending time gathering papers and then paying someone to figure it out…knowing I could take my stuff to ten different preparers and get ten different returns.

Yes, why should individuals and business have to spend so much time, effort and money just to deal with taxes?

We are not talking a small sum when it comes to big businesses, whole departments are in place…and millions are spent just to insure compliance. That time, money and effort could be used for higher employee salaries, R & D, lower prices, whatever…

The primary reason US companies have moved to foreign shores is the 40% taxes they must pay here. Ireland has only a 10% rate. China, only 15%.

Trump’s plan to lower the tax rate down to about 15% will be the incentive to bring companies back to America…along with jobs.

Proven, time and time again…The higher the tax rate, the less you take in. The lower the tax rate, the more you take in. VOLUME!

No, a consumption tax was the very thing that our colonial-era founders rebelled against. When anyone says, ‘revenue neutral’, you know it’s hogswallop. Congress is pulling in almost 500% of the revenues needed to fund the 17 services that We The People authorize for federal government, in Article I, Section 8 of the US Constitution.

Back in 2005, former IRS Fraud Examiner Sherry Jackson estimated there were 67 million non-filers. I’ve been a law-abiding Nontaxpayer for 19 years, and on my hobby site ‘A Tax Honesty Primer’, I explain why all ‘revenue-neutral’ tax plans are a pig in a poke: http://TaxHonestyPrimer.com

WIN WHAT !!!? I seen Mitch Mc Connell in the background among others and it looked like a no WIN situation , to ME. With these others in the group WE THE PEOPLE are hung out to dry ! Yes once again we are taking it in the ol’ bungy again. Sold into slavery by a bunch of FFFF’g TRAITORS

Supposedly, the oil that we are going to be exporting is not the grade used for gasoline.

Overall, the Dems are running victory laps. They wouldn’t have gotten as much if they were in charge of both houses.

The Establishment aka Republican wing of the Democratic Party believes that is can win over Dems by showing Republicans as inclusive, women, blacks, hispanics, yada, yada, yada. This at the expense of the party’s base.

Every time the pussilanimous Republican establishment tries this, it blows up in it’s face. Every time Republicans stick to real conservative ideas, they win.

Dems are, confidently, saying, “See how stupid Republicans are.” …”Why would you go over to the vacillating Republican Party”…”We’re getting every thing we want, as it is”…”If you like your party, you can keep your party”

yea – a big ‘win’ for special interests on both ends of the political spectrum. Quadrupled the temp visa’s to 1M+ to satisfy big business while wages stagnate & un- & underemployed Citizens are left in the cold. Dems did not lose a thing as the few GOP ‘wins’ were only 2 yr extensions or less. Why do you think Obama signed it so quickl7 & complimented Ryan???
Ryan is a liberal GOP when it comes to spending – how else explain the fact that this bill INCREASED the deficit??? $18T & growing – tks Ryan & spineless GOP who voted for it (my Rep and both my Senators said ‘NO!’ – tks Sen’s Grassley & Ernst and Cong. Kin).
PS – a kick in the teeth to Veterans as they are disproportionately unemployed. As for Law & Order? Sanctuary cities were left untouched; it’s better to be an illegal alien than a citizen & a Vet. Ryan? A ‘sold out’ to Wall St, big Texas oil & Pelosi! RINO! See where his donations come from; follow the $$$!

This article is utter nonsense from nose to tail. Paul Ryan is a D.C. machine politician, and this Omnibus Bill violates the U.S. Constitution in almost *every* particular.

As for oil exporting, it should of course be legal. Free markets are always best for the consumer; but given the relative price of production and the current market glut, it won’t matter to American consumers, only to producers.

The ‘Peak Oil’ myth is now officially dead; the Green River Formation in CO/UT/WY alone has been shown to contain oil reserves equal to all known oil formations in the world, *combined*. This is a sop to the domestic producers; it will not equate to net increase in the average American household economy, or to increases in average ‘oil patch’ salaries; only to the top dogs’ profits. As usual.

As for ‘tax reform’, the minute you write ‘revenue neutral’, you have shown your hand. Washington DC is pulling in 500% of revenues necessary to discharge its 17 duties that We The People stipulate in the Constitution. Keeping revenues ‘neutral’ means continuing on this communist path to self-destruction! Revenues MUST be cut; it is the only way to cut the size of government; anyone promising the latter without the former, is lying.

The war for our country is not progressives v. conservatives; it is not blacks v. whites, or men v. women, or Christians v. atheists. It is Washington DC v. America. In 2016, America goes on offense, at last. See the 5-min video here:

A big win? You have got to be kidding. Exporting petroleum will be more profitable than using it here, so who loses? Us consumers. Another example of who owns the establishment Republicans and who they work for. Everything else was just “spend spend spend”.
And you still don’t get why Trump has appeal to the masses.

So…..we get more money from oil exports and millions of more babies are murdered, and you think this is a fair trade off? Fewer tax loopholes, but the revenue stays the same, no true tax relief for the middle class, it’s just harder for the upper crust to use loopholes…but they’re really still there? Lays the groundwork for obamacare repeal?? Just repeal it already! It’s already laid it’s own groundword for repeal by gutting companies that have tried to follow it’s guidelines. Bottom line: we got nothing and obama got just about everything he wanted. No need to try to sugar coat it. The signers are traitors to the people who elected them to pull this administration back. Nothing new here… move on now.

2016 is already set to be “wild”. From this Ominous bill to a rigged presidential election in 2016.
Voters need to use their brain instead of their heart when voting. We were mesmerized by Obama in 2004 a big talker and look who’s in first place again. People are mesmerized all over again with Donald Trump. He has good ideas but does not tell us he will put them in place. And so the games begin again. OH YES and do elect another politician for president they have done so well so far. Really?

The real tragedy is that these authors have had about as much of an opportunity to read and understand this 2,009 page monstrosity as any of the treasonous traitorous legislators who voted in favor of it have had. How dare the treasonous traitorous media comment on a bill that they have not completely read and understand? This is the real lunacy of what is happening in this country right now – we have so-called leaders who are voting in favor of bills they cannot and do not read or understand and then we have pundits opining on the same. This is pure madness.

I’ve read some of the comments, and it appears that the Republican Majority in the House
has succeeded in completing the ‘Divide & Conquer BHO Wh Adm Agenda’! The Omnibus Spending the USA Into Oblivion Bill which funds EVERY BHO objective goal is such a blow to the most reasonable and expected outcome of most American citizens.

Whatever degree of trust and optimism that might have been placed in House Speaker Ryan has dwindled far beyond the suggestion that Conservatives, etc., should just adopt a ‘Wait & See’ attitude to find out if the three ‘take-aways’ are ever accomplished…?

Obummercare will implode on its own. Tax Reform is a political joke with the steady growth in our population of illegal immigrants and refugees who will drain local, state, and federal resources dry! Did you catch that ‘special tax break’ for independent oil refiners?

The elected voices of We the People did not do their job which is to put the Safety and Security of Americans FIRST using OUR hard earned tax dollars ~ not adding to the Misery Index with approval for funding every single progressive, socialist, liberal, dem, and BHO provision. Name even one provision the opposition lost ~ 0…!

The appropriation spending bill passed by Congress this week contains only discretionary funding, not mandatory spending.

Of the money Planned Parenthood receives from the government funding (including state funding) the vast majority – nearly 90% – comes from Medicaid or other entitlement programs (CHIP, Medicare). Thus only about 10% of their funding is from this bill through Title X “Family Planning Program. ”

However, “Hyde” language was maintained in the spending bill that explicitly states that NO government funds can go to funding abortion or abortion services.

Domestic Hyde Limitation funding can be found on pages 1006-1007 (Sec. 506-507). And language explicitly prohibiting Title X funding being used for abortion can be found on page 893.

Despite not being able to entirely carve out any government funding for non-abortion services to planned parenthood, we were able to achieve several other existing and NEW pro-life wins including:

· For the first time, ban the Food and Drug Administration from approving genetic modification of human embryos (such as creating three-parent embryos)

· Achieve a new funding reduction for the U.N. Population Fund by $2.5 million despite fierce Democrat opposition

In order to tackle mandatory funding, one of the first actions the House will take in 2016 is to vote on a budget reconciliation. In reconciliation, in addition to repealing Obamacare we will prohibit any state from allowing Medicaid dollars to be paid to abortion providers, such as Planned Parenthood as we continue to investigate allegations of the horrific harvesting of children’s organs and the handling of infant lives.